Danny Ings

[Angryred]

His contract has expired though, no one should be allowed to dictate where he can or cannot go.

Exactly, a lot of players have Jean Marc Bosman to thank for!

[Vermilion]

His contract has expired though, no one should be allowed to dictate where he can or cannot go.

Agree. It's daft, Burnley have accepted our bid, Ings has said no to Spurs, shouldn't be any problem imo.

Except that it has to go through this damn tribunal and there was an alternative higher offer, which may or may not influence them.

[vlahka]

Pleeeaase go to spurs.

[The_weatherman]

Pleeeaase go to spurs.

In a perverse way, I really want him to come now

[Maxiedge]

Something doesn't make sense. Would he turn down an offer from Spurs to come and be 3 or 4th choice here? There, at least, he'd be 2nd choice and maybe even a starter with Kane. In terms of development, he'd be much better off there, imo.

Fair play to him but I'm still incredibly dubious about our transfer activity and what we're going to end up with come end of summer

[Lee]

I'm still unsure why Spurs felt the need to bid anything for Ings when he had two months left on his contract.

Seems very strange.

[Shaggy]

Seemed like they wanted Trippier so colluded with Burnley over Ings with their phantom bid....but then Trippier to Spurs looks like it might be off so who knows.

[dww]

It's almost as if they were just ****ing with a direct rival in the market. Maybe? Or perhaps I have been infected with Twitter-think.

[Exiled_red]

Agree. It's daft, Burnley have accepted our bid, Ings has said no to Spurs, shouldn't be any problem imo.

Except that it has to go through this damn tribunal and there was an alternative higher offer, which may or may not influence them.

Burnley won't have accepted our bid because we won't have made one, we have approached Ings as a player out of contract.

Spurs made a bid to sign him while he was still under contract (just).

While he is under contract Burnley have the right to sell him to anyone who makes a bid assuming Ings accepts their terms. But whether Burnley accept a bid or not Ings has the right to just wait his contract out and make his own deal without Burnley getting a say. They just get compenstation from the club he goes to

[Lee]

Seemed like they wanted Trippier so colluded with Burnley over Ings with their phantom bid....but then Trippier to Spurs looks like it might be off so who knows.

It's almost as if they were just ****ing with a direct rival in the market. Maybe? Or perhaps I have been infected with Twitter-think.

That's my guess too. Spurs want Trippier, Burnley know they're going to lose Ings to us, we're a direct rival to Spurs, Burnley grab some more poke from the tribunal and Spurs pay less for Tripp...

No. Stop it Lee.

[Rich]

Meh.

[The_weatherman]

Something doesn't make sense. Would he turn down an offer from Spurs to come and be 3 or 4th choice here? There, at least, he'd be 2nd choice and maybe even a starter with Kane. In terms of development, he'd be much better off there, imo.

Fair play to him but I'm still incredibly dubious about our transfer activity and what we're going to end up with come end of summer

Maybe we are only signing Ings and Origi for the striker positions? Ings as second/third along Origi and Lambert or Balotelli as fourth?

[Exiled_red]

I'm still unsure why Spurs felt the need to bid anything for Ings when he had two months left on his contract.

Seems very strange.

The only reason I can see is to try to push the fee up for us. The bid was always going to be accepted (Burnley try to get £12m rather than see what they get as compensation).

If Spurs wanted him and thought they could get him they would have done what we did. Their bid only makes sense if they knew they couldn't get him and wanted to push the price up for whoever did.

[SK]

I'm still unsure why Spurs felt the need to bid anything for Ings when he had two months left on his contract.

Seems very strange.

I think they were just trying to legally get him to negotiate a contract a month before anyone else, but would eventually just pay the tribunal fee.

[Maxiedge]

Maybe we are only signing Ings and Origi for the striker positions? Ings as second/third along Origi and Lambert or Balotelli as fourth?

Wouldn't surprise me.

We've been so desperate for a striker but I'd say now, as we've bought in two unknown quantities in Ings and Origi, it would be a bit mindless to splurge out on a striker. I would rather bring in a top class midfielder, defender, or even GK now.

Or at least first sell off Borini, Balotelli and Lambert (wouldn't mind if he stayed).